首页> 外文会议>National Poultry Waste Management Symposium >CO-PERMITTING AND OTHER ISSUES: CONCERNS AND CONSEQUENCES
【24h】

CO-PERMITTING AND OTHER ISSUES: CONCERNS AND CONSEQUENCES

机译:共同允许和其他问题:担忧和后果

获取原文

摘要

What does all this mean and where does it lead us? It is hard to say, but we will conclude this paper with a few thoughts. First, even if the CWA granted EPA the authority to permit all livestock operations and require co-permits of all agricultural processors, it would still be bad public policy. The structural and global implications of this type of public policy have not been properly analyzed by EPA or tested within the legislative arena. Secondly, our Constitution provides for three distinct branches of government - if one branch over-reaches their authority, it is the responsibility of the other two to provide check and balances - my point - under our system of government, the ends does not justify the means and "popular environmental causes" are no different. Unfortunately, the relation between the ends and the means remain widely misunderstood within EPA. Milton Friedman believes "it is tempting to believe the social evils arise from the activities of evil men (or business) and that if only good men (like good EPA bureaucrats) wielded power, all would be well." A. de Tocqueville, - predicted a "new kind of servitude" when -"after having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp, and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic character can not penetrate to rise above the crowd. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrial animals, of which government is the shepherd."
机译:这一切均值是什么,它引导我们在哪里?很难说,但我们将用几个想法结束这篇论文。首先,即使CWA授予EPA,允许所有畜牧行动并要求所有农业处理器的共同许可,它仍然是不良的公共政策。对这类公共政策的结构和全球影响尚未得到EPA或在立法竞技场中进行的妥善分析。其次,我们的宪法规定了三个不同的政府分支 - 如果一个分支过度达到其权威,那么另外两个人的责任是提供检查和平衡 - 我的观点 - 在我们的政府制度下,目的并不是证明意思和“流行的环境原因”并非不同。不幸的是,目的之间的关系和手段在EPA内仍然被广泛误解。米尔顿弗里德曼认为“令人兴奋的是,相信社会邪恶来自邪恶的人(或商业)的活动,如果只有好人(如良好的EPA官僚)挥动力量,一切都会好起来的。” A. de Tocqueville, - 预测了“新种类的”奴役“何时 - ”在连续掌握了社区的每个成员之后,默默运动,最高权力将其臂延伸到整个社区。它涵盖了社会的表面与小复杂的规则,分钟和制服的网络,通过哪种原创性思想和最有能量的性格不能渗透到人群之上。这样的权力不会破坏,但它可以防止存在;它没有暴力,但它压缩,熄灭,熄灭,才能让人发呆,直到每个国家都没有比一群胆小和工业动物更好,政府是牧羊人的任何东西。“

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号